The majority of people who lived in the Soviet Union want it back. Your complaints about socialism don’t make any sense, either.

Leftists are always telling you to read theory and organize. Here’s a Marxist-Leninist intro reading list, and the Party for Socialism and Liberation is a good org to join.

Fascism and liberalism are not distinct ideologies, but the same ideology in different circumstances. Liberalism is the nice mask, fascism is the brutal one, and Capitalism will use whichever the bourgoeisie feels is necessary to maintain control and profits.

Critiquing liberalism is a “left” thing, not an “alt-left” thing, and I don’t even know what that means.

This isn’t quite correct. Governance and economy are too interlinked to be considered distinct, systems aren’t recipes picked out on a page but a material, physical thing. Further, “authoritarianism” isn’t really a thing in and of itself, it just describes the phenomenon where one class oppresses others. In Socialism, the proletariat oppresses the bourgeousie, in Capitalism the bourgeoisie oppresses the proletariat.

Yes, but more specifically the stage of capitalism known as imperialism. Imperialism is the economic inevitability of late-stage capitalist countries, which includes the export of capital and the division of the world along imperialist lines. The US Empire is the current world hegemon, but imperialism also has forces that work against its existence in the imperialized countries, which is accelerating the decline of the US.

Sure? Balkanization seems like a good way to speed up the process of the Empire collapsing.

The vast majority of people sent to prison by the soviets were criminals, thieves, murderers, rapists, etc. The political prisoners were largely members of the White Army, fascists, monarchists, or were active terrorists against society. For a country that went through a revolution, resistance from the older owning classes is expected, other revolutions were similar in use of force against the monarchy and other ruling classes.

Marxism is anti-utopian, it’s based on analyzing how societies evolve over time. What is deemed “authoritarianism” is the need for the proletariat to exert its control over the bourgeoisie, rather than the reverse, yet bourgeois rule is more authoritarian.

This is splitting hairs to justify a fubdamentally irrational argument based on false conclusions. I agree about one thing, though, this isn’t a productive conversation.

You’re implying several things here:

1. The PRC would have imprisoned just as many people as the US, except the people starved to death.

2. Premise 1 requires everyone to have starved to have been meant for imprisonment

3. Premise 1 and 2 are comparisons of the prisons of a developed country to the living conditions of a rapidly developing country lifting itself out of feudalism.

This isn’t a rational argument! I already said you had a hypothesis you wanted to test, but you keep pretending it has valid conclusions despite not doing the legwork!

Nah, I don’t retract my statement. Everyone who read this post knows about the Great Chinese Famine. Nobody is unaware of it. The point of the post is that the PRC is, in general, less willing to willy-nilly imprispn people, which is true, and reflected both during the Cultural Revolution and today. The point isn’t to paint the PRC as a paradise, but to show that even during difficult times, the PRC was less inclined to mass-imprison people than the US Empire is, which is correct, and you came here trying to make it seem like it was a bad thing.

I think it’s rather chauvanistic to try to say it’s better to live imprisoned in a developed country than non-imprisoned in a developing country, a developing country that managed to double life expectancy under Mao even when famine was included thanks to the rapid development and dramatic improvements in equality and social services.

The only purpose of your comment was to be a contrarion, and an anti-communist. Again, you have a hypothesis, but no proof, inequality was far lower in the PRC than the US and as such the idea of the most impoverished being hit isn’t really as accurate. There wasn’t the same instrument where the impoverished are driven to crime out of desparation that exists in the US, while there was still poverty in the PRC, it was far more even.

Again, you have a hypothesis, but no proof.

I think you’re confused, I’m a communist, I despise the US Empirevand condemn the war. Further, Israel doesn’t control the US, the US supports Israel because Israel is like a giant millitary base for the US to terrorize its geopolitical adversaries.

To be fair, the US isn’t a democracy at all, and even among USians this war is extremely unpopular.

No, economic factors matter far more. Religion is often used as an excuse, or plays some role, but the real drive is access to trade or resources or labor in the vast majority of cases.

Religion isn’t the cause, the mode of production is. Economic factors are far more important when it comes to war, including this one.

Doubt it. Climate change is already happening, but we can mitigate its effects the earlier we tackle it. Plus, no idea who is floating the collapse idea around.

You’d need the rate to multiply by five times to be equal. You have a hypothesis and no proof behind it, yet you treat it like it would multiply the incarceration rate by over five times had there been no famine. All this really amounts to is “PRC bad” for the sake of it.

He ends a bunch of his tweets that way, he’s very strange.

May the US Empire crumble to dust, its only vestiges a dark stain on human existence for future historians to look on with disgust.